The current pope even stated he believed atheists could make it into heaven. It just might take them longer to get there. Let's assume god is benevolent and good for a moment, which positive theists like to claim. It's only logical that he would seek to create goodness, as it's in his image. Why would he create something to be separate from himself and to punish? So some theists conclude he would not and that really all people can still go to heaven, but their coming around on god could take very long.

I agree and many of my family and friends have blind faith, but I will say that is not as innocent as you would like to think. As long as the rest of the world follows religion they aren't likely to prioritize things like the singularity that really matter to a lot of atheists. They may not be directly harming us, but they are often the reason we don't make advances in stem cell research or get funding for longevity research.

That terrorists only hate America due to their religion and not because of US involvement in bombing and occupying over 8 Muslim countries.

Source: Almost every terrorist who has been caught’s statement in court.

Edit: a lot of people are asking for sources. Here is a list I compiled from public sources that can be easily verified by googling text from the quotes.

Here are quotes from several attackers since, and including 9/11:

French Shooter “In a recording of what followed, a man the station identifies as Coulibaly holds a dialogue with others—apparently hostages—in which he says he attacked because the French military has attacked Muslims in the Middle East and Mali, including ISIS militants. “I was born in France. If they didn’t attack other countries, I wouldn’t be here,” a voice says in RTL’s recording.”

Boston Bomber “He equated the three people who were killed in the marathon bombings and the more than 250 others who were injured to ‘collateral damage’ like the thousands of innocent Muslim victims of American wars across the globe. ‘When you attack one Muslim, you attack all Muslims,’ he reportedly wrote.”

Underwear Bomber “In quick response to some of the things that have been said, I say my life and the lives of Muslims have also changed due to the attacks on innocent civilians,” he added.”

Shoe Bomber: “I further admit my allegiance to Osama bin Laden, to Islam, and to the religion of Allah. With regards to what you said about killing innocent people, I will say one thing. Your government has killed 2 million children in Iraq. If you want to think about something, against 2 million, I don’t see no comparison. Your government has sponsored the rape and torture of Muslims in the prisons of Egypt and Turkey and Syria and Jordan with their money and with their weapons. I don’t know, see what I done as being equal to rape and to torture, or to the deaths of the two million children in Iraq. So, for this reason, I think I ought not apologize for my actions. I am at war with your country. I’m at war with them not for personal reasons but because they have murdered more than, so many children and they have oppressed my religion and they have oppressed people for no reason except that they say we believe in Allah. This is the only reason that America sponsors Egypt. It’s the only reason they sponsor Turkey. It’s the only reason they back Israel. As far as the sentence is concerned, it’s in your hand. Only really it is not even in your hand. It’s in Allah’s hand. I put my trust in Allah totally and I know that he will give victory to his religion. And he will give victory to those who believe and he will destroy those who wish to oppress the people because they believe in Allah. So you can judge and I leave you to judge. And I don’t mind. This is all I have to say. And I bear witness to Muhammad this is Allah’s message.”

Bin Laden’s Letter to America While seeking Allah’s help, we form our reply based on two questions directed at the Americans: (Q1) Why are we fighting and opposing you? Q2)What are we calling you to, and what do we want from you? As for the first question: Why are we fighting and opposing you? The answer is very simple: (1) Because you attacked us and continue to attack us. I am by no means a “terrorist sympathizer,” but remember back during the 2004 election, a certain republican candidate talking about what the CIA calls “blowback,” and how bombing and overthrowing middle eastern governments will lead to an increase in terrorists, and threats against us and other nations allied with us. This idea has seemed to completely escape the realm of mainstream thought, and I think it is time to discuss the unintended consequences of our foreign policy.

Pulse Shooter, Omar Mateen SUSPECT: No. Because you have to tell America to stop bombing Syria and Iraq. They are killing a lot of innocent people. What am I to do here when my people are getting killed over there. You get what I'm saying

Killer of Brendan Tevlin in NJ “Had he taken his case to trial, Brown faced overwhelming prosecution evidence -- including his own jailhouse admission that he killed Tevlin as an act of vengeance for lives lost to U.S. foreign policy actions in the Middle East.”

The single biggest factor in whether a baby boy is circumcised is whether his father is:

The strongest factor associated with the circumcision decision was whether or not the father was circumcised (P.0001). The survey also showed that concerns about the attitudes of peers and their sons' self concept in the future were prominent among parents deciding to circumcise.

The whole idea that penises look weird if they're uncut, or that there are significant health risks associated with foreskins, or that uncut penises are unclean... they're all used as rationalisations for parents who just want their kids to look like them. As for why the American culture of circumcision took off in the first place... well, it was because it was believed that cutting off the foreskin reduced pleasure and was likely to reduce masturbation; a common similar treatment for women at the time was to burn the clitoris with acid, for the same reason. Thankfully that one fell out of fashion, but circumcision remained.

Sorry, guys: you might not like it, you might feel that you're perfectly satisfied with your penis, and that's fine, but there's no getting away from the fact that the odds are pretty good that your pecker got the knife as a result of a misinformation campaign in the twenties.

Where I'm from those boxes cost $4. Sounds like this mom bought them for $4, set up out front to sell for $5 each to turn a profit, and then doubled down on the farce to pocket your money since she didn't have a cookie supplier or real girl scout anyway.

I agree with you entirely. And how frustrating is it to see things we don't prioritize be so mainstream as to draw in funding while something we equate with life itself is ignored. But you quickly realize we who care are in the minority.

The best transition I would like to see happen is for medical companies, particularly pharmaceutical ones, to move away from treating myriad diseases to simply building more reliable organs. Things like this would help and maybe not require much of a paradigm shift. But if we want to save our brains we probably need a Manhattan project scale interest or it may not happen in our lifetime. Alternatively, AI might bail us out if human interest doesn't. Maybe it becomes an easier problem to solve.

People have always had trouble actually separating the debate into the real issue. It's popular to hate Monsanto and therefore to hate against GMO's. It's the rallying cry. The real problems are not the health concern of GMO's. There is no mechanism by which they are dangerous to our health. It's the Round Up that is used in heavy abundance that is the health issue. Then there is the litigious nature of Monsanto. And terrible copyright patent laws. But the act of genetically altering the plants? We've been doing it for millennia through cross-breeding. We've just found a way to be more efficient at it because we're the most intelligent creatures on the planet.

Edited: I meant patent laws, not copyright laws, but those are terrible too!

I fully agree with you. I had no idea how much Monsanto had won until the Bill Gates comments yesterday and responses to these threads today. Ten years ago the debate was about Roundup and things like it. Now they're arguing about the genetics of the food to shout over the real complaint about what's in the foods when they are actually grown. It's a complete alternative facts misdirection away from the arguments against Roundup and other harmful chemicals many of these GMO foods were created to withstand.

The issue is they don’t. They criticize health studies and scientists for being on the payroll of big corporations, completely ignoring academic integrity and peer review, and accuse anyone who tries to educate them of shilling for Monsanto.

Bill Gates is the richest dude on earth last I checked and arguably the most influential philanthropist. He can’t be bought and they can’t accuse him of shilling for Monsanto like they do every time someone tries to set these idiots straight. This statement caries an enormous amount of weight as far as the public is concerned.

I think you are misunderstanding Bill Gates. He's trying to get good to millions of starving people in large populations. GMOs are great for this. The foods can grow more easily because they have been modified to withstand harsher conditions for growth. In many cases they can still grow despite being doused in weed and bug killer. If you are starving, I'm sure that food is a welcome source of calories. If you aren't starving, then you have the luxury of caring about the dangers of eating weed and bug killers absorbed in the foods that have been modified to proliferate while being doused in it. GMOs are so common now that we can't stereotype them all to be the same. Most all of them are perfectly wonderful if grown in a controlled environment. But you are deluding yourself and stumping for Monsanto and others if you are in denial of the fact that huge swaths of these plants were specifically bred to be bathed in biologically devastating chemicals.

I was specifically thinking that people are treating this like anti-vaxxing and it is not a fair comparison. Vaccines are generally safe. Many genetically modified foods are safe. Now imagine you have an egg allergy and egg is used in a vaccine. Doctors recommend you take a non-egg variant. Now imagine your GMO food has Roundup in it because it mixed with the water the food pulled in to grow. That is a health risk. If you are starving for food then you probably don't give a sh-- that Roundup might be in your fresh vegetable. That vegetable is still important to eat. If you are in the first world and have the luxury of being picky in your shopping, then it's very reasonable to not want Roundup in your vegetables. What you don't realize is that companies like Monsanto are clearly winning when they've successfully duped the current generation into arguing about the genetic food itself rather than the Roundup and other chemicals they're spraying. A decade ago it was clear that the concern was on pesticides entering the foods and how many companies focused on modifications to complement pesticide application. Yet here we are with a whole thread about the macro foods to distract us from the micro chemical pesticide argument that is the real concern.

I took my friends here last summer and she was disappointed at the only vegetarian option: potatoes, some carrots and soup iirc (might’ve been chili). Any plans to give vegetarians a better menu for the considerable price tag of seeing a show? The waiter gave her extra veggies even though he wasn’t supposed to because he felt bad about how pathetic the “meal” was.

At this point it is hard to take you seriously and I have to begin to wonder if you are just making this up for Reddit. It's clear she is hiding more, still prefers the BIL over you, and will gladly manipulate this whole situation to demonize you in order to hide how terrible of a person she was and continues to be. I understand denial is very strong and you don't want to believe your wife is this far gone, but the evidence to all of us is incredibly obvious. Good for you talking to the BIL, but now you should protect the families involved and what that actually means is protecting them from your wife's manipulation.

GMO foods are perfectly healthy and the technique has the possibility to reduce starvation and malnutrition when it is reviewed in the right way. I don't stay away from non-GMO foods but it is disappointing that people view it as better.

Make sure you get your own divorce lawyer. Don't let her take advantage of you just because you want to be nice. You stand to lose a lot in the divorce. I can almost guarantee you'll find a much healthier relationship soon and it will become easy to see by comparison how she mistreated you. At that point you'll wonder why you ever did get any favors at the cost of your future.

I think the most likely scenario is that the person will be able to have their brain scanned, and their consciousness copied to a computer (which is close enough to immortality for me, but many disagree). As far as bringing the actual person back from a frozen state to a living state... that may never happen. Even if you think humans will be able to do that in a thousand years, consider that the body will have to remain perfectly preserved all that time for it to even be possible.

I think you need to differentiate between memories and consciousness. I'm confident they'll be able to save some of our memory like on a hard drive, but will we have consciousness or just be AI at that point?

And this begs the very real question of whether we're really just computers to begin with and consciousness is something we claim because it had been important to our evolution by thinking we matter.

The silver lining there is if we're just comparable AI to begin with then maybe consciousness is easy to replicate or create.

Cryonics has promise, but right now many that they are saving have low odds of revival. I'm okay with low participation as long as they are getting enough funding to improve research and methods. I'd hate to see them get millions of early subscribers who all just had to bite the dust once they found a workable solution because the earlier freezing process was too damaging. That would be bad PR. So I hope they can improve the process before mainstream casuals take places in line in front of me.

Normally if I find myself fighting their ADC 1V1 I feel like I've gone wrong somewhere. I much rather set up a game where I'm on a backline and not actually taking hits. If comps make that difficult, I think your choice is rational for laning phase. If you don't care about attack speed, sure. But if you plan to AA in late game it seems questionable.

Your wife is only being more open with you because you are onto her. She's not being open with her own sister about this at all, because she's been able to orchestrate it so that the sister isn't as onto it. Meanwhile she enjoys talking to the BIL the most. These are red flags -- preferring honesty with the other guy over her husband or sister. Her urge to hide this from the sister isn't any different from her urge to hide it from you. She'll manipulate you right into doing what she wants if you aren't careful.

Based on the deleted texts it sounds like a real affair and that their last run together was so they could work together to find a solution. I think the asking for a kiss was fabricated and the text message saying the same was purposeful. They agreed to that because it looks like a PG resolution everyone could move on from and your wife was hoping it could all get swept under the rug after that.

I can imagine a Reddit thread where some guy says his wife acts like she's trying to leave him and has a lot of time at home without him, but swears everything is okay when he confronts her about it, even though all signs point to her lying. Bet half the threads say to get a lawyer, then hire a PI or surveillance the house.

Recording you is messed up. Undeniable. I understand the nature of white lies to get your ducks in a row to leave. It's a little unsettling, though, for him to be onto you about something being not right and then see you try to make a case about him not being right mentally when his paranoia about this specifically is right on target.

Did you two have a vow about sickness and health? Have you stated clearly what you need to see done to stay in the marriage or are you just trying to get out period?

Hey, I’ve wondered the same thing as most top/mid on the enemy teams don’t guard their jungles top buff. If you have a champ that can solo the buff and make it to lane with enough sustain that would be best. You can also maybe start with smite/teleport with spellbook and trade the smite for flash later after taking the buff, backing then teleporting to lane. Unsealed also provides extra cooldown on summoners which is really nice. Let me know how it works out.

Any team who doesn't guard top buff after a top laner takes smite deserves to lose. It's a good strat, but the enemy team should be on alert if you took smite. Probably works silver and bronze. Shouldn't work gold and up.

I played on a team with Sion top who did much like you describe. He made it work. But starting strategies with ignite and teleport also can be played effectively. I'm not sure this smite strategy will help you overcome the opponent taking his respective summoner, but at least you have a game plan.

There is truth to the myth. When you eat food blood is drawn toward your stomach to aid in digestion. Blood is not as quickly available elsewhere as a result, so muscle contraction is slightly altered when you try activity after eating.

Another attempt by Zoe mains to not get her nerfed. As a frequent Lux player I laugh at your burst champion doing what mine can only do when also using my ultimate. I love how Zoe players ignore that she also has an ultimate and that with Lichbane is completely abusable.